Anna Raccoon Archives

Post navigation

Reading between the lines

The Anna Raccoon Archives

by SadButMadLad on May 21, 2011

Orville Smith, a store manager for Best Buy in Augusta, Georgia, told police he observed a male customer, later identified as Tyrone Jackson of Augusta, on surveillance cameras putting a laptop computer under his jacket. When confronted the man became irate, knocked down an employee, drew a knife and ran for the door.

Outside on the sidewalk were four Marines collecting toys for the “Toys for Tots” program. Smith said the Marines stopped the man, but he stabbed one of the Marines, Cpl. Phillip Duggan, in the back; the injury did not appear to be severe.

After Police and an ambulance arrived at the scene Cpl. Duggan was transported for treatment.

“The subject was also transported to the local hospital with two broken arms, a broken ankle, a broken leg, several missing teeth, possible broken ribs, multiple contusions, assorted lacerations, a broken nose and a broken jaw…injuries he sustained when he slipped and fell off of the curb after stabbing the Marine,” according to a police report.

After reading the above news report you will be lead to believe that Tyrone Jackson was actually set upon by the marines for stabbing their collegue rather than tripping up.

But the fiction is stranger than the truth. In actual fact Tracey Attaway suffered no injuries and was jailed and charged with armed robbery, aggravated assault and possession of a knife in the commission of a crime.

Did you spot the mistake in the previous paragraph? Yep the name changed from Tyrone to Tracey. There was a similar mistake in the last paragraph of the quoted newspaper report. It was all totally made up.

But how many of you were hoping that it was true. Would it be ok for people to take the law into their own hands and for the authorities to cover it up in such a way. Or is it just a reaction to the current situation where criminals stab police officers and only get charged with GBH rather than actually get a sentence more in keeping with their crime.

As a hang em and flog em libertarian I have no problem with justice being dispensed by the public. Of course if you get it wrong and duff over an innocent person then you should suffer the consequences.

Not sure what you mean by ‘only get charged with’ in the last paragraph. GBH with intent would seem to be the exact right crime for the scumbag in the linked article to be charged with. You can’t be complaining about the sentence either, because he hasn’t been sentenced yet. Could be anything up to life for that offence. (Yes, I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s a pathetic sentence, but that remains to be seen)

I’m not sure how violent retaliation fits in with the non-aggression principle, but, and subject to correction, it seems to me that independent retaliation fits with the libertarian ethos. The counter argument runs along the lines that displacing retaliation to the monopoly of the state prevents escalation to serial retaliation. I think I prefer the counter argument.

The difficulty with displacing retaliation to a state monopoly arises when people see the state’s retaliation as insufficient. I don’t think it matters whether dissatisfaction with the level of retaliation is real or imagined; either way, it leads to a slide towards the kind of lawlessness that displacing retaliation aims to avoid.

Exactly right but not popular: if Justice were despensed – instead of the flimsy “law of the day” that we have to put up with – then nobody would have a problem. I prefer the retaliation as it is far more like Justice.